WORKERS DISPUTE SABOTAGE CHARGES

Embattled nursing home workers tried to stem the damage Friday from allegations of sabotage, saying they were outraged by the accusations and remained committed to improving the quality of patient care.

Although stopping short of saying that the allegations had no merit, workers at a union press conference said they were stunned by charges that in the hours before a one-day strike on March 20, patient ID bracelets and "Do Not Resuscitate" stickers were removed, diabetics were given chocolate and some residents were told they'd be killed or poisoned by replacement workers.

"We do not tolerate this. This is appalling to us. And we will not stand for it," said Debby Sibley, a nurse at the Mediplex of Stamford nursing home.

The workers emphasized that their union does not condone any behavior with the potential to harm patients and they encouraged the appropriate authorities to investigate.

"We were out there striking for our patients," said Sue Stockwell, a nurse at Olympus Healthcare in Farmington. "We didn't do anything to our patients."

The workers, members of New England Health Care Employees Union, District 1199, said they feared that the allegations were diverting attention from their efforts to improve staffing levels at nursing homes throughout the state.

The allegations are included in more than a dozen complaints filed by managers at seven nursing homes with the state Department of Public Health, which is investigating. A handful of new episodes surfaced Friday, including the alleged removal of medicine from a cart at one nursing home.

The incidents will also be scrutinized closely by Chief State's Attorney John M. Bailey, who met Friday with health department officials and said he would make investigating the complaints a "top priority."

"We take these as very serious allegations," he said. Bailey said he hopes to meet with union officials next week.

Teresa Cusano, the state's long-term care ombudsman, said that visitors to two nursing homes had complained to her office that ID bracelets had been removed from Alzheimer's and dementia patients, and that medical charts had been switched.

At the state Capitol -- where the union has been pressing for increased funding -- legislative leaders said publicly that while the reported incidents were disturbing, they would not rush to judgment by punishing the union when they deliberate about nursing-home spending.

Gov. John G. Rowland has proposed adding $50 million for nursing home spending over the next two years -- an amount that union leaders said falls woefully short of addressing their salary and staffing needs.

"If these allegations are true -- whether it be 1199 workers or replacement workers or nursing home owners [at fault] -- what happened is wrong," said Senate President Pro Tem Kevin B. Sullivan, D-West Hartford.

But in terms of the union's push for more state money, Sullivan said, the allegations "don't diminish the issues that are out there. They don't diminish whether it's right to have 30 or 40 people cared for by one person at night in a nursing home."

Sullivan said that "a few bad apples" shouldn't hurt the union's credibility any more than a few bad nursing home owners should ruin that industry's reputation.

But privately, some legislative leaders acknowledged that if the allegations proved true, the union's efforts to secure financial support could be hurt.

"This whole thing could shift on a dime, especially if it turns out there was any kind of widespread, organized effort" to disrupt patient care, one Democratic insider said.

State Rep. Brian J. Flaherty of Watertown, a Republican deputy leader in the House, said that if the allegations proved true, "There will be somewhat of an effect [in the legislature] because I can see no quarter in the Capitol for the union bosses to pretend not to know about it."

Flaherty noted, however, that upcoming state budget decisions will affect all nursing home workers, not only those in the union.

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said Friday that the reported incidents also could bear on the union's attempt to prove in a federal lawsuit that Rowland had illegally taken sides in the labor dispute by expediting payments to nursing homes for replacement workers and helping to transport those workers.

In an opinion requested last week by top Democrats, Blumenthal said that the state could take steps that might favor one side only if there were a clear and immediate threat to public health or safety.

"The evidence about these incidents could be directly relevant to whether the standard [of a threat to public safety] was met" by the state, he said.

Blumenthal said he was not aware of the reports of sabotage when he wrote the opinion. Had he been, "We might have mentioned that evidence as being relevant to meeting the standards. Obviously, these are extraordinarily serious allegations -- absolutely reprehensible and unconscionable."

Flaherty said the allegations were likely to prompt renewed calls for a no-strike provision for nursing home workers -- although he said it was too soon to predict whether those calls would end up as proposed legislation. Such provisions often include binding arbitration clauses as well.

At the Olympus Health Care Center in Waterbury, where several complaints of wrongdoing were filed, the news of the allegations stunned Rhea Wood, a nurse. She said that nurses, aides and other health care workers were devoted to helping their residents and that they resented the image of the union being painted by these reports.

She said that while there might have been an isolated incident or two, the reports of widespread havoc defied belief.

"Everyone's angry," she said. "They're saying things we know are not true as far as our facility goes."